302 or 351 w ???
Post Fiend
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,323
Likes: 2
From: Montana Territory
302 or 351 w ???
I am not trying to disagree with anyone but that appears that it seems as though I was coming off that way. Use of the vehicle is exactly why FoMoCo gives you options. You bought so don't complain about it. If you don't like it sell it.
The stuff I got that helps produce power and increase your gas mileage isn't any secret.
Turbocharger, not a supercharger. High performance ignition, Cold air induction, better exhaust, correct themostat for your application, pulleys that reduce load on crankshaft, high amp alternator, electric fan, just about anything that you do to your motor will help improve power and increase gas mileage provided that you stay out of the gas pedal will help your gas mileage.
The stuff I got that helps produce power and increase your gas mileage isn't any secret.
Turbocharger, not a supercharger. High performance ignition, Cold air induction, better exhaust, correct themostat for your application, pulleys that reduce load on crankshaft, high amp alternator, electric fan, just about anything that you do to your motor will help improve power and increase gas mileage provided that you stay out of the gas pedal will help your gas mileage.
Post Fiend
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 5,964
Likes: 1
From: Woodruff, SC
302 or 351 w ???
Seeing that you plan to use the truck for work more than play i would go with the 351. My 79 F100 S/B has a 302 and is my work truck at present so i can tell you when it's loaded it drinks fuel. I have started a buildup of another 302 and plan on replacing my tired one with it, However when i do that the truck will be only a daily driver with a little oomph! 
Just my
Just my
Mountain Pass
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
From: FORD COUNTRY --TEXAS--
302 or 351 w ???
Originally posted by fatfenders
The 351 will usually get the same if not better fuel economy. In very simplistic terms, it's because it's not under load all the time with the carbs throttle blades standing vertical everytime you load the engine down a bit.
The 351 will usually get the same if not better fuel economy. In very simplistic terms, it's because it's not under load all the time with the carbs throttle blades standing vertical everytime you load the engine down a bit.
New User
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
From: Long Island NY
302 or 351 w ???
As far as Franks question goes Fatfenders hit the nail on the head with his first post. When it comes to gas mileage its kinda silly to argue about as individual driving style and rear end ratios play as much apart as the 49 cubic inches. My wife always questions why her car gets twice the mileage when she drives it as when I do.
Skip_T
1934 Ford PU (4.11 rear, crappy mileage but big smile)
Skip_T
1934 Ford PU (4.11 rear, crappy mileage but big smile)
Post Fiend
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 6,328
Likes: 124
From: Iowa
302 or 351 w ???
Originally posted by zemus420
How is that possible I have had a 302 which would get 250 miles on a full tank of gas. Now that I have a 351W I get about 170-180 mile on a tank of gas. Explain this? both where EFI.
How is that possible I have had a 302 which would get 250 miles on a full tank of gas. Now that I have a 351W I get about 170-180 mile on a tank of gas. Explain this? both where EFI.
Your EFI doesn't have the requisite carb I mentioned. Now put both those engines in the late 70s LTDs and you'll see what I was talking about.
Seriously though, you just can't make a blanket statement that smaller engines get better fuel mileage. It would be a debate without resolution. There are just too many variables involved. As I recall when shopping for my 95, the EPA sticker promised roughly the same fuel efficiency for 300-6, 302 or 351. The joke around here is all Ford trucks get 15 MPG no matter what engine. If somebody flames me for that comment I'm gonna scream. It's just a joke, but I have found it not too far from reality once you get a few miles on them. You'll get the occasional guy in denial and bad at long division, that will swear his F250 4X4 with a 460 knocks down 28MPG. But it isn't likely so.
Same with building a high performance engine that gets 18MPG. Yes it can certainly be done. Don't mean to make Racer Dave mad, but make one bad decision on the parts selection and suddenly you're getting 8 MPG instead. Been there, done that, got the gas receipts.
Have a good Memorial Day.
Regards
Mountain Pass
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 226
Likes: 12
302 or 351 w ???
Frank,
You mentioned that you were not looking for speed, just a good reliable engine. IMHO, I think you would be more than happy either way you decided to go.
MPG-wise, for occasional work, you most likely won't see a significant difference. Driving around town, you most likely won't be able to tell a difference at all.
Power wise, a 351W will haul better with it's extra low end grunt, but a 302 will be able to pull anything you can put in the truck, just maybe not with the same 0-60 as the 351.
I crammed 2000# worth of wood pellets in the back of my Bronco (with it's 302) once, and it didn't have any issues pulling the weight, and that's way over the GVW limit in a Bronco.
If I were you, I'd just put in whichever motor you can get the better deal on.
Brian
You mentioned that you were not looking for speed, just a good reliable engine. IMHO, I think you would be more than happy either way you decided to go.
MPG-wise, for occasional work, you most likely won't see a significant difference. Driving around town, you most likely won't be able to tell a difference at all.
Power wise, a 351W will haul better with it's extra low end grunt, but a 302 will be able to pull anything you can put in the truck, just maybe not with the same 0-60 as the 351.
I crammed 2000# worth of wood pellets in the back of my Bronco (with it's 302) once, and it didn't have any issues pulling the weight, and that's way over the GVW limit in a Bronco.
If I were you, I'd just put in whichever motor you can get the better deal on.
Brian
Senior User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 465
Likes: 1
From: Tower MN, Houghton MI
302 or 351 w ???
I would go 351W without a doubt!
This is back when I had 34" swampers on my truck
When My truck had a good running 302EFI in it, I got 8mpg everywhere.
With a 351W, 4BBL, I got 14 MPG with it.
The 351 4BBL motor not only gets 6 mpg [i]more[/p] than the 302EFI, but it also has way more low end grunt and passing power.
This is back when I had 34" swampers on my truck
When My truck had a good running 302EFI in it, I got 8mpg everywhere.
With a 351W, 4BBL, I got 14 MPG with it.
The 351 4BBL motor not only gets 6 mpg [i]more[/p] than the 302EFI, but it also has way more low end grunt and passing power.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
10 Things Every Truck Owner NEEDS (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalyptic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Most Expensive Ford Trucks Ever Sold on Bring a Trailer
Joe Kucinski
2027 Ford Super Duty Buyer's Guide (Every Model, Engine, & Package)
Brett Foote
Top 10 Ford Truck Tragedies
Joe Kucinski
AEV FXL Super Duty - the Super Duty Raptor Ford Doesn't Make
Brett Foote
Lobo Vs Lobo: Proof the F-150 Lobo Should Be Even Lower!
Michael S. Palmer
Ford's 2001 Explorer Sportsman Concept Looks For a New Home
Verdad Gallardo
10 Best Ford Truck Engines We Miss the Most!
Joe Kucinski
New User
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
From: Atlanta USA
302 or 351 w ???
I was told the Intakes and carb can make all the difference in the world. I have a 302 with the original 2V carb 500 CFM I think I cant recall. I was getting 12 or so on the highway. Before I changed the 4:10 in the rear I was getting 6 to 8 at best. I kept a well tuned truck. Power tuning seemed to help me get optimal MPG. I rebuilt the carb often to maintain seals and diaphragms. I was told if I went to a 4V 600+ CFM( 2 x 2 setup) and could keep my foot of the pedal that I would get better MPG. Tires are another issue as well. And Vehicle weight. If I had another truck I would probably trick it out with blown motor, but this is my show truck So I will sacrifice any big mods to keep her the way she was.
that I would get better MPG. Tires are another issue as well. And Vehicle weight. If I had another truck I would probably trick it out with blown motor, but this is my show truck So I will sacrifice any big mods to keep her the way she was.
Senior User
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
From: McCaysville,Ga
302 or 351 w ???
I have experienced the difference in both of these engines, and i will tell you that my 351w with edelbrock 4bbl got better gas milage the 302 2bbl that i put in it. the 351w definitely makes more low end grunt and pulls better, but im not knocking the 302 cause it is a durable engine. as is the 351w.
Senior User
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 434
Likes: 2
From: Oregon: Land of the Majes
302 or 351 w ???
Wow, RacerDave, you appear to have been busy here....I am still recalling when you first started posting, and you had so many questions..... Sorry, the AOD is gone......anyway.....this thread will never have an ending, as I have a different take: I have NEVER gotten decent mileage out of any 302's. I drive the hell out of everything I am in, and 302's straight from Ford are usually so inefficient that I spend most of my time driving one either in a bog(with it losing speed), or flooring it to get it out of it's own way. Underbuilding an engine just to pass a smog test is a joke.....
Post Fiend
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 6,328
Likes: 124
From: Iowa
302 or 351 w ???
"I was told the Intakes and carb can make all the difference in the world."
It certainly helps if you get the lame OEM induction and emission crap out of the picture. My 302 with Edelbrock Performer carb, cam and manifold with duals makes power quite acceptable now. But we're still only talking roughly equivalent to stock 351W performance IMO, after all that trouble. You also need to have correct gears so the 302 can wind up a biit tighter than a 351W. Too early to judge my fuel efficiency yet but I don't expect a miracle in my fairly heavy application. I have seen good MPG from 302s, but the whole package has to be just right. Agree with Moose that your mileage gonna vary if the app requires your foot in the pedal constantly. Sounds a lot like my 95 I-6, AODE F150 too.
It certainly helps if you get the lame OEM induction and emission crap out of the picture. My 302 with Edelbrock Performer carb, cam and manifold with duals makes power quite acceptable now. But we're still only talking roughly equivalent to stock 351W performance IMO, after all that trouble. You also need to have correct gears so the 302 can wind up a biit tighter than a 351W. Too early to judge my fuel efficiency yet but I don't expect a miracle in my fairly heavy application. I have seen good MPG from 302s, but the whole package has to be just right. Agree with Moose that your mileage gonna vary if the app requires your foot in the pedal constantly. Sounds a lot like my 95 I-6, AODE F150 too.
New User
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
From: Arkadelphia, AR
302 or 351 w ???
Just bought my first truck back and I am tickled!
1983 F150 XLT 4X4, long wheelbase, automatic no o/d
The truck has a 302 in it, and I'm looking for a 351W to go in it. My worry is how many of my factory brackets (power steering, a/c, alt.) are going to fit. I know EFI would be much better on MPG, etc but I need simplicity and am planning on going carbed. How much trouble would a '74 351W be to put in this truck? It has a front sump pan which would have to be swapped to rear sump, but where else am I going to run into trouble? I plan on fixing this truck up slowly, and know what I'm getting into since I owned it before (and therefore turned nearly every bolt on it at some point). In this truck the 302 has always lacked low end umph and has always had cooling issues. I plan on going to a bigger radiator w/ the 351 and am thinking about electric fan(s). Any suggestions anyone can offer will be appreciated.
An interesting note, my poor 1996 Chevrolet is beginning to feel neglected, I've only driven it 17 miles in the two weeks since buying the Ford back!!
Last edited by shortyjackson; Jun 1, 2003 at 03:34 AM.
Post Fiend
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,323
Likes: 2
From: Montana Territory
302 or 351 w ???
The 351W will go in there with only the motor mounts from a 351W. They are a little different than the other windsor blocks. the brackets should work fine since they are adjustable. You probably don't need the electric fan because the bigger radiator should fix your cooling issues.
Senior User
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
From: McCaysville,Ga
302 or 351 w ???
the info on the motor mounts is incorrect, the 351w has the same motor mounts as the 302 and will bolt right in the 302"s place. not trying to bash anybody or anything though!!